SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

The Ugandan government should take prompt action to end unlawful arrest and torture by its anti-terrorism unit, Human Rights Watch said in a report released today.
The 89-page report, "Open Secret: Illegal Detention and Torture by the Joint Anti-terrorism Task Force in Uganda," documents the task force's abusive response to alleged rebel and terrorist activity by unlawfully detaining and brutally torturing suspects. Human Rights Watch found that agents of JATT, as it is known, carry out arrests wearing civilian clothes with no identifying insignia and do not inform suspects of the reasons for their arrest. The agents force suspects into unmarked cars, blindfolded and handcuffed, and take them to JATT's headquarters in Kololo, a rich suburb of Kampala. Many are then taken to military intelligence headquarters in Kitante for further brutal interrogations.
"Surrounded by ambassadors' residences and lush mansions in Kololo, JATT detains and beats suspects and holds them for months without any contact with family or lawyers," said Georgette Gagnon, Africa director at Human Rights Watch. "Uganda conveniently uses the broad mantle of anti-terrorism to abuse and torture suspects."
Human Rights Watch found that over the past two years, the unit illegally detained more than 100 people and tortured at least 25 during interrogations. Four died of their injuries, and the whereabouts of five others last seen in the unit's custody remain unknown. Human Rights Watch said the government has failed to hold responsible JATT members accountable for the abuses. The government has a duty both to end these practices and to prosecute those responsible, Human Rights Watch said.
Donors to the Ugandan security efforts, such as the United States and United Kingdom, who are training and supporting Uganda's counterterrorism operations, should work to ensure that basic rights are afforded to all suspects. These donors should withhold counterterrorism-related funding to the Ugandan security forces until the Ugandan government investigates abuses by JATT and the Chieftancy of Military Intelligence, or CMI, and prosecutes as appropriate those found to be involved.
JATT is a joint operation, formed in 1999, which draws its personnel from the police, the internal and external intelligence organizations, and military intelligence. The unit has no codified mandate, though the Ugandan Constitution requires any intelligence service to be established through an act of parliament.
The unit apparently defines its anti-terrorism mission in the broadest terms. Most suspects arrested by the unit are Muslims, a minority in the majority Christian nation, and are accused of some involvement with the Allied Democratic Forces (ADF), a Ugandan rebel group based in Congo. Other suspects include individuals with alleged links to al-Qaeda suspects. Although many detainees have been released without charges, some have been charged with terrorism or treason. Not one of those charged has had a trial, though some have been held for long periods on remand. Some former detainees also told Human Rights Watch that JATT personnel coerced them to seek amnesty from the government - allowed under Ugandan law for those accused of certain eligible crimes - but those amnestied end up stigmatized as rebels.
The report is based on extensive interviews that Human Rights Watch conducted with more than 80 witnesses, family members of detainees and victims, including 25 former detainees of the Kololo headquarters, who described their detention and torture in stark detail.
JATT personnel beat suspects with the butts of guns, fists, whips, canes, chairs, and boots during interrogations. They forced red chili pepper into suspects' eyes, nose, and ears, causing excruciating pain. Some detainees reported that JATT personnel used electricity to shock them during interrogations. Many said they had been forced to observe other detainees being tortured while in detention in Kololo and during interrogations at the headquarters of CMI in Kitante, Kampala.
Human Rights Watch uncovered several cases of death from torture. Saidi Lutaaya, a taxi driver, died at Mulago hospital on November 22, 2007, shortly after being arrested by the anti-terror unit. Hospital records indicate that he arrived in a comatose state, but information regarding the cause of his death was not completed on his death certificate. One detainee who saw Lutaaya in Kololo said that after being interrogated, he tried to stand up but fell over and appeared to be unconscious while guards told him he would be beaten for pretending to be injured. He had large head wounds. Military intelligence denied any knowledge of Lutaaya's arrest or death.
Another former detainee, Hamza Tayebwa, died shortly after being transferred from Kololo to Luzira prison. Former detainees witnessed anti-terror personnel beating Tayebwa in detention. Human Rights Watch is not aware of any investigations into these or other deaths of Kololo detainees.
While most individuals whose detention was documented by Human Rights Watch are male, there are instances of women being held in Kololo apparently because male family members were alleged to be affiliated with the rebel group. At one point in January 2008, detainees saw three children believed to be under 2 years old held with their mothers in Kololo. JATT has also illegally detained citizens of several foreign countries.
During a January 24, 2009 meeting with Human Rights Watch, the military intelligence chief, Brig. James Mugira, who has operational command over JATT forces, said that detainees are occasionally held beyond the 48-hour constitutional limit for detention prior to charge, but denied that its personnel mistreat the prisoners. Mugira said that "high profile" people are brought to the offices in Kololo to be held separately from common criminals. He maintained that Kololo was not "outside the law," despite the fact it has not been classified as a detention facility by the Minister of Internal Affairs, as required by law. Brig. Mugira hold Human Rights Watch that he intends to "polish up" JATT operations, but didn't specify what changes would take place. He has been in his current position since August 2008.
The Ugandan government has a responsibility under international law to investigate allegations of abuses by its forces and to hold those responsible to account. President Yoweri Museveni and the National Security Council should take an active role in curtailing those abuses and ensure that prosecutors have the independence to investigate torture and illegal detention by JATT. Parliament also has a mandated duty under Ugandan law to oversee the work of the military, the police, and the intelligence organizations, including JATT. But that oversight has not taken place, and allegations of abuse have been played down or ignored.
"The Ugandan government should act immediately to end torture by JATT and prosecute all those responsible, regardless of rank," said Gagnon. "The president and parliament should ensure that there is public scrutiny of JATT's activities and more oversight of the security and intelligence sector as a whole."
Selected accounts from former detainees of JATT's headquarters in Kololo
"I didn't sleep all night because I was afraid. In the morning, a group of men came in. One pointed a gun at me and said that I was a rebel. He asked me which part of the bush I had been in. The one pointing the gun at me made me lie down on the floor of the sitting room. One stepped on my head and another was beating me and stepping on my ankles and slapping me around the ears. They kept stepping on my head and beating me over and over again on the knees and ankles. They beat other people in front of me. One was laid down on the floor and then one of them stepped on his ribs. I saw many people being treated like that. It was hard to watch."
- Female detainee, arrested and detained for 10 days by JATT in their Kololo offices, before being charged in 2006. She was released on bail after two years in detention and was never tried.
"After four months in that garage in Kololo, I was taken to CMI, where I was interrogated and given a beating. When we went inside, the soldiers started beating me with a black whip. And then one hit me very hard on the back with the flat of his hand. It felt like my heart would burst out of my chest."
- Male detainee, arrested and detained for seven months by JATT in their Kololo offices and released without charge
"[The JATT agent] went out of the room and came back with a small plastic container, which had pepper in it. They started stuffing pepper in our eyes and Mucunguzi, who was holding the upper part of my eye while Semakula held down the lower lid, picked pepper from the container and pushed it into my eyes. I was the last to suffer this, so I saw very well what these guys were doing to my fellow detainees. Semakula had wrapped his hand with a polythene paper to avoid direct contact with the pepper in the plastic container as he stuffed it in our eyes. The pain was too much and at this point I could not see anything. Then they resumed the beating and I could tell not who was beating who."
- Male detainee, arrested and detained for 11 months by JATT in their Kololo offices and released without charge
Human Rights Watch is one of the world's leading independent organizations dedicated to defending and protecting human rights. By focusing international attention where human rights are violated, we give voice to the oppressed and hold oppressors accountable for their crimes. Our rigorous, objective investigations and strategic, targeted advocacy build intense pressure for action and raise the cost of human rights abuse. For 30 years, Human Rights Watch has worked tenaciously to lay the legal and moral groundwork for deep-rooted change and has fought to bring greater justice and security to people around the world.
"Sounds like Trump preparing himself an off-ramp and trying to dump the Hormuz mess on others," said one observer.
President Donald Trump on Friday continued to send contradictory messages on his plans for the US-Israeli assault on Iran, declaring that he is not interested in a ceasefire but is nevertheless considering "winding down" the three-week war, just two days after ordering thousands more troops to the Middle East
Trump wrote on his Truth Social network, "We are getting very close to meeting our objectives as we consider winding down our great Military efforts in the Middle East with respect to the Terrorist Regime of Iran."
Separately, the president told reporters Friday that he does not "want to do a ceasefire" in Iran.
This, after the president reportedly ordered 4,000 additional US troops deployed to the Mideast. On Friday, an unnamed US official told Axios that Trump is considering sending even more troops in order to secure the opening of the Strait of Hormuz and possibly occupy Kharg Island, home to a port from which around 90% of Iran's crude oil is exported.
Sound like Trump preparing himself an offramp and trying to dump the Hormuz mess on others. But as it is Trump, who knows and this could change in short order.
[image or embed]
— Brian Finucane (@bcfinucane.bsky.social) March 20, 2026 at 2:21 PM
Trump also said Friday that the Strait of Hormuz must be "guarded and policed" by other nations that use the vital waterway, through which around 20 million barrels of oil passed daily before the war.
Some observers questioned the timing of Trump's "winding down" post. Investment adviser Amit Kukreja said on X that Trump "obviously saw the market reaction towards the end of the day," and "now once again, he’s trying to convince everyone that the war is done; just not sure if the market believes it anymore."
Others mocked Trump's assertion—which he has repeated for two weeks—that the war is almost won, and his claim that he is winding down the operation as he sends more troops and asks Congress for $200 billion in additional funds.
Still others warned against sending US ground troops into Iran—a move opposed by more than two-thirds of American voters, according to a Data for Progress survey published Thursday.
"I cannot overstate what a disastrous decision it would be for President Trump to order American boots on the ground in this illegal war and send US troops to fight and die in Iran," Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) said Friday on social media.
Noting other Trump contradictions—including his declaration that "we're flying wherever we want" and "have nobody even shooting at us" a day after a US F-35 fighter jet was hit by Iranian air defenses—Chicago technology and political commentator Tom Joseph said Friday on X that "Trump has no idea what he’s doing."
"Call out Trump’s incompetence. This war is like a cartoon to him. He desperately needs a series of a catastrophes to distract from Epstein so he’s letting it happen," Joseph added, referring to the late convicted child sex criminal and former Trump friend Jeffrey Epstein. The war is solvable, but Trump has to go be removed from office first."
"It's unfortunate that it took this long for the Pentagon's ridiculous policy to be thrown in the trash," said one press freedom advocate.
A federal judge in Washington, DC blocked the US Department of Defense's widely decried press policy on Friday, which The New York Times and reporter Julian Barnes had argued violates their rights under the First and Fifth amendments to the Constitution.
The Times filed its lawsuit in December, shortly after the first briefing for the "Pentagon Propaganda Corps," which critics called those who signed the DOD's pledge not to report on any information unless it is explicitly authorized by the Trump administration. Journalists who refused the agreement turned over their press credentials and carried out boxes of their belongings.
"A primary purpose of the First Amendment is to enable the press to publish what it will and the public to read what it chooses, free of any official proscription," Judge Paul Friedman, who was appointed to the US District Court for DC by former President Bill Clinton, wrote in a 40-page opinion.
"Those who drafted the First Amendment believed that the nation's security requires a free press and an informed people and that such security is endangered by governmental suppression of political speech," he continued. "That principle has preserved the nation’s security for almost 250 years. It must not be abandoned now."
Friedman recognized that "national security must be protected, the security of our troops must be protected, and war plans must be protected," but also stressed that "especially in light of the country's recent incursion into Venezuela and its ongoing war with Iran, it is more important than ever that the public have access to information from a variety of perspectives about what its government is doing—so that the public can support government policies, if it wants to support them; protest, if it wants to protest; and decide based on full, complete, and open information who they are going to vote for in the next election."
The newspaper said that Friday's ruling "enforces the constitutionally protected rights for the free press in this country. Americans deserve visibility into how their government is being run, and the actions the military is taking in their name and with their tax dollars. Today's ruling reaffirms the right of the Times and other independent media to continue to ask questions on the public's behalf."
The Times had hired a prominent First Amendment lawyer, Theodore Boutrous Jr. of Gibson Dunn, who celebrated the decision as "a powerful rejection of the Pentagon's effort to impede freedom of the press and the reporting of vital information to the American people during a time of war."
"As the court recognized, those provisions violate not only the First Amendment and the due process clause, but also the founding principle that the nation's security depends upon a free press," Boutrous said. "The district court's opinion is not just a win for the Times, Mr. Barnes, and other journalists, but most importantly, for the American people who benefit from their coverage of the Pentagon."
Seth Stern, chief of advocacy at Freedom of the Press Foundation, also welcomed the ruling, saying that "the judge was right to see the Pentagon's outrageous censorship for what it is, but this wasn't exactly a close call. If the same issue was presented as a hypothetical question on a first-year law school exam, the professor would be criticized for making the test too easy."
"It's shocking that this sweeping prior restraint was the official policy of our federal government and that Department of Justice lawyers had the nerve to argue that journalists asking questions of the government is criminal," Stern declared. "Fifty years ago, the Supreme Court called prior restraints on the press 'the most serious and the least tolerable' of First Amendment violations. At the time, the court was talking about relatively targeted orders restraining specific reporting because of a specific alleged threat—like in the Pentagon Papers case, where the government falsely claimed that the documents about the Vietnam War leaked by Daniel Ellsberg threatened national security."
"Courts back then could never have anticipated the government broadly restraining all reporting that it doesn't authorize without any justification beyond hypothetical speculation," he added. "It's unfortunate that it took this long for the Pentagon's ridiculous policy to be thrown in the trash. Especially now that we are spending money and blood on yet another war based on constantly shifting pretexts, journalists should double down on their commitment to finding out what the Pentagon does not want the public to know rather than parroting 'authorized' narratives."
The Trump administration has not yet said whether it will appeal the decision in the case, which was brought against the DOD—which President Donald Trump calls the Department of War—as well as Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and the Pentagon’s chief spokesperson, Sean Parnell.
"When the international community didn't stop Israel as it deliberately killed nearly 75,000 Palestinians in Gaza, including 20,000 children, Israel knew they could kill civilians with impunity," said one critic.
Eighty percent of Lebanese people killed in Israel's renewed airstrikes on its northern neighbor were slain in attacks targeting only or mainly civilians, a leading international conflict monitor said Friday.
Reuters, using data provided by the Madison, Wisconsin-based Armed Conflict Location and Event Data (ACLED), reported that 666 people were killed by Israeli strikes on Lebanon between March 1-16. As of Thursday, Lebanese officials said the death toll from Israeli attacks had topped 1,000.
While Lebanese authorities do not break down the combatant status of those killed and wounded during the war, Israel's targeting of civilian infrastructure, including entire apartment buildings, and reports of whole families being wiped out, have belied Israeli officials' claims that they do everything possible to avoid harming civilians.
Classified Israel Defense Forces (IDF) data leaked last year revealed that—despite Israeli government claims of a historically low civilian-to-combatant kill ratio—83% of Palestinians killed during the first 19 weeks of the genocidal war on Gaza were civilians.
According to Gaza officials, 2,700 families were erased from the civil registry in the Palestinian exclave during Israel's genocidal assault.
"When the international community didn't stop Israel as it deliberately killed nearly 75,000 Palestinians in Gaza, including 20,000 children, Israel knew they could kill civilians with impunity," Lebanese diplomat Mohamad Safa said on social media earlier this week. "The result is exactly what we're seeing in Lebanon and Iran right now."
US-Israeli bombing of Iran has killed at least 1,444 people, according to officials in Tehran. The independent, Washington, DC-based monitor Human Rights Activists in Iran (HRAI) says the death toll is over twice as high as the official count and includes nearly 1,400 civilians.
The February 28 US massacre of around 175 children and staff at an elementary school for girls in the southern city of Minab—which US President Donald Trump initially tried to blame on Iran—remains the deadliest known incident of the three-week war.
As Israeli airstrikes intensify and the IDF prepares for a possible ground invasion of southern Lebanon—which Israel occupied from 1982-2000—experts are warning that noncombatants will once again pay the heaviest price.
United Nations officials and others assert that Israel's intentional attacks on civilians are war crimes. Israel is the subject of an ongoing genocide case filed by South Africa at the International Court of Justice, and the International Criminal Court has issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, who are accused of crimes against humanity and war crimes in Gaza.
"Deliberately attacking civilians or civilian objects amounts to a war crime," UN High Commissioner for Human Rights spokesperson Thameen al-Kheetan said earlier this week. "In addition, international law provides for specific protections for healthcare workers, as well as people at heightened risk, such as the elderly, women, and displaced people."
As was the case during Israel's bombing of Gaza and Lebanon following the October 7, 2023 attack, journalists are apparently being deliberately targeted again. Reporters Without Borders said in December that, for the third straight year, Israel was the world's leading killer of journalists in 2025.
"This was a deliberate, targeted attack on journalists," said RT correspondent Steve Sweeney after narrowly surviving an IDF airstrike on Thursday. "There's no mistake about it. This was an Israeli precision strike from a fighter jet."
"But if they think they’re going to silence us, if they think we're going to stay out of the field, they’re very, very much mistaken," he added.